tv America Live FOX News November 29, 2012 10:00am-12:00pm PST
more research. zebras can actually be crossed with ponies in case you didn't know. on your screen is a zony, possibly the cutest animal in the world, according to our producer. so in the case you're looking for that last minute christmas gift, a zony. [laughter] jon: nice. thanks for being with us today. jenna: "america live" starts right now. megyn: thanks, guys. fox news alert, new signs that negotiations may be breaking down in washington's effort to head off a series of automatic tax hikes and spending cuts that will hit americans hard in the new year unless something is done to stop it. welcome to "america live," everyone, i'm megyn kelly. treasury secretary timothy geithner headed to capitol hill today, in fact, he's still there, meeting with congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle. but after his sit-down with the speaker of the house, john boehner, mr. speaker boehner came out and told reporter that is the treasury secretary
offered no new substantive plan and would not address the issue of spending cuts at all. as we reported on this show yesterday, it is no longer clear that the white house even wants spending cuts in this initial deal. it wants solely tax hikes, or at least that's all that it's been talking about x that now -- that dichotomy -- is becoming a big issue. here's the speaker. >> two weeks ago we had a very productive conversation at the white house. but based on where we stand today, i would say two things. first, despite the claims that the president supports a balanced approach, democrats have yet to get serious about real spending cuts. and secondly, no substantive progress has been made in the talks between the white house and the house over the last two weeks. megyn: well, meantime, senate majority leader harry reid argues he is still waiting for a
reasonable proposal from republicans. this all comes after a leading voice on debt taxes and spending warned about the cost of not getting a deal done in the short time that's left. >> with i'm a guy that drives at 55. i'm more optic or less optimistic, i'm hopeful, but don't put me anywhere near the optimistic category. we have got a long way to go and a very few days to get it done. megyn: chris stirewalt is host of "power play" on foxnews.com life. it doesn't sound promising, and it doesn't sound like tim geithner made a lot of progress so far on the hill today, chris. >> well, one assumes that secretary geithner's job was to tell republicans, look, you don't like what we're asking you to do now, but later we're going to do a deal that you're going to like. give us a deal we like now, and later on we'll give you something back, we promise. for republicans who were skeptical to begin with about the idea of increasing taxes, now they are absolutely up in arms because by their way of
thinking, this was supposed to be a negotiation about what to do on spending and taxes. now the administration's making it clear this is just about taxes. megyn: the republicans wanted spending cuts, the democrats wanted tax hikes. the democrats are now talking about tax hikes and thinking that the republicans are going to agree to just that. why would they think that when the republicans all along have said what we want is spending cuts? why would they think there would be an agreement to only what the democrats want and not any of what the republicans want? >> well, firstly, the democrats are increasingly feeling good election, election results. they felt like they had dodged a bullet. now they feel like, hey, we've got a mandate, and that's for higher tax rates. what it comes down to for the democrats now, can the president with the help of the establishment press apply constant pressure every day for the next month to say the republicans are being reckless with people's tax rates? if they pressure enough, enough republicans will break away, and then the president not only will
get the tax increase he wanted, but he'll also be in a much stronger position when it comes to negotiating the next round of this stuff. megyn: is that likely to happen? because these house republicans, if you look on a national basis, the mesh people want to -- the american people want to see taxes go up on the rich, and they don't like spending cuts when it comes down the specific programs. do you want to see social security messed with? no. medicare? no. medicaid? no. those are the big three entitlement spending. so the american public on a general basis may be behind the white house on this, but these house republicans care about what their hometown constituents want, because those are the people who just sent them back to congress even though they had these positions leading up to the election too. >> the house speaker is trying very hard right now with the help of his leadership team to hold the line. he is trying to get republicans to hold the line, because some of them are freaking out, and some of them are say, no, no, no, we've got to get out from under this thick, we've got -- this thing, we've got to get the
president and the press off our backs, we've got to get away from this, and they're feeling the burn as christmas approaches. boehner's trying to hold the line and say we are the party that doesn't increase taxes. we've got to find a way to get think this, and he won't have as much negotiating power, he knows, if his team starts to get a little wiffly. megyn: what is likely to happen here? i realize the democrats believe they have a mandate, but in terms of a negotiation what really matters is what the republicans believe. because if they don't think the democrats have a mandate, then they are not likely to bend. >> well, what's increasingly likely to happen is that if you pay federal income taxes, they're going to go up. that's what's increasingly likely to happen. because as the president goes out and does this campaign-style stuff and keeps the pressure on and accuses the republicans of ruining christmas and all of that, it's just going to harden resistance inside the republican caucus of these guys that say, no way, we're not doing it. and this is going to get pretty scary.
megyn: like the fox news alert. [laughter] thanks, chris. >> yes, ma'am. you bet. megyn: well, as americans face the possibility of tax hikes and spending cuts, we are getting a new snapshot of our economy. the number of americans seeking unemployment benefits fell last week by 23,000, but the total, 393,000, is still way above where we need to be to bring the unemployment rate down. in fact, our four week unemployment average went up to over 405,000 last week. the report for the whole month is out a week from tomorrow. meantime, a new report finds that the number of americans on food stamps spiked by about 10% last year. that means about 15 million american households got food stamps in 2011, and it is even more profound when you look at what america has and has not created over the past decade. look at this chart. private employment is the line at the very bottom. it's gone down. this is going all the way back to 2002, i think it is?
yeah, so look at this. you can see there starts to be a dramatic change around '08, '09. so private employment down, government employment slightly up, medicaid enrollment has soared -- that's what you get that helps folks without a lot of means -- and look at the top line. that represents the food stamps. look at the spike. indicative of some of the struggles we've faced in this country over the past few years. well, some of the folks who have found jobs recently have been hired in anticipation of the christmas season, and black friday p shoppers weren't just looking for deals on the latest electronics. turns out gun sales were also a red hot item. the fbi says it could barely keep up with demand from firearms dealers who were seeking background checks on potential buyers. anna coyman is live in randolph, new jersey,ing with more. hey, anna. >> reporter: well, the fbi saying that this black friday they fielded about 155,000 calls
for background checks which did wreak the black friday -- break the black friday record from last year, and they even said some of their call centers were so inundated that they experienced brief blackout periods and had to sop stop taking calls which, of course, hurt the bottom line of some gun shop owners including the one here saying he had to start turning away customers at 1:00 in the afternoon on the busiest shopping day of the year. now, the reason for the surge in gun sales, some gun shop owners are attributing it to politics and mother nature, fears that lawmakers might soon enact tougher gun control laws. and across the northeast, residents wanting to protect themselves following superstorm sandy. >> since the election you've had the perfect storm. you've had hurricane sandy, you've had the re-election of barack obama, and you have people realizing that not only is it their second amendment right, but they may be in a situation where they need a firearm to protect themselves. and they're coming to that realization, and it's just caused an uptick and a spike,
and last friday, you know, on black friday it was through the roof. >> reporter: according to gallup, 43% of women surveyed last year reported owning a gun which is a new high. the nra reports that over the last four o or five years there's been an exponential increase in women participating in safety classes, licensing programs and women-only hunting programs. some women feel safer just knowing how to use guns. >> i felt like if we were going to have guns in the home, that i should know how the handle them, know if it's loaded, you know? i mean, there's going to be guns in the house, i can't have something that i'm afraid of and don't know what to -- you know, it's dangerous. so i took a class, and i found that i really enjoyed it. >> reporter: and she even knows a few of her own -- owns a few of her own guns now. some gun manufacturers are starting to market more toward women, you see the ear protection on in this female behind me, these rifles, a camo pic one, a hot pink one and even
a breast cancer awareness handgun. back to you. megyn: wow, all right. thanks, anna. we are hearing security fears as the administration defends a possible plan to bring guantanamo bay detainees to u.s. soil. we'll tell you why, and we'll speak next to a man whose family was devastated by two separate terror attacks in this country. he will tell us why he thinks the last thing we should do is be bringing those detainees to u.s. prisons. and a former attorney general says he has got a list of reasons why susan rice is not qualified to be secretary of state, and most of them have nothing to do with benghazi. michael mukasey tells us what they are when he joins us live in just a bit. and a debate over a plan that could save taxpayers billions. there is a new push to get rid of the dollar bill, just ahead. ♪ [ whistle blows ]
hi victor! mom? i know you got to go in a minute but this is a real quick me, that's perfect for two! campbell's chunky beef with country vegetables, poured over rice! [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup. it fills you up right. is efficiently absorbed in small continuous amounts. citracal slow release continuously releases calcium plus d with efficient absorption in one daily dose. citracal slow release.
[ male announcer ] it's that time of year again. medicare open enrollment. time to compare plans and costs. you don't have to make changes. but it never hurts to see if you can find better coverage, save money, or both. and check out the preventive benefits you get after the health care law. ♪ open enrollment ends dember 7th. so now's the time. visit care.gov or call 1-800-medicare.
megyn: well, the obama administration is today defending a possible plan to bring guantanamo bay detainees to the united states. well, no. dianne feinstein is defending her request for a report that talks about how we can do it if only we will find the political will. and as she looks at that report or and the gao -- that is an administration organization -- releases this report, we are hearing some heartbreaking stories from some victims' families who are very much opposed to the idea, families who are warning about the dangers of bringing these terrorists here on american soil. among them, our next guest, a man whose family became a victim in two separate terror attacks here in america. one where his father was killed in the 1975 bombing of franz's tavern in manhattan and the other where his cousin steve died on september 11th of 2001. steve was in the north tower working for cantor fitzgerald
during the terror attack. joining me now, joe connor, to author of "the new founders." senator feinstein has requested this report from the general accounting office on could we do it, can we transfer these prisoners, 170 or so, from admit mow onto u.s. soil, and how much would it cost, and what would it take? and the gao has produced a report that says we can do it, and the report says if the political will exists, dianne feinstein says, we can finally close gitmo without imperilling our national security. your thoughts? >> well, i think it's the same. there is no reason to let these people back into the united states. they're in a place now where we've paid millions of dollars to create gitmo, it will cost multimillions to bring them back here. the supreme court has ruled that they are enemy combatants, they are not prisoners, they can't be put in the regular prison population, and we'd have to retrofit all our prisons they might go to. so from that perspective in a country that has a fiscal cliff in front of us, why would we -- from a money perspective -- get
involved in bringing them back here? but there's a lot more to it than that. megyn: there is some speculation that she may be -- apparently, reportedly she ordered this report a long time ago, years ago, and it's just now being released. why is that? she's going to use the $114 million we spend on gitmo as an argument that, look, it needs to go, we shouldn't be spending that $114 million, but i want to talk to you about your concern because the house of representatives has said we're not going to provide the funding to bring those detainees back on american soil. that's why she's referring to political will. but there's no guarantee these republicans are going to hold on to control of the house come the next midterm election, and what is the argument against having them here separate and apart from the money? >> well, this is not an unprecedented situation. we have terrorists in the u.s. here. one of them is a guy named oscar lopez ri varian ro who killed -- who killed my father, and he was
granted clemency by the clintons and the deputy attorney general at the time. oscar tried to escape from prison twice. one time they had bombs, they had guns, they were ready to kill the guards. fine stein, one of her arguments is that these prisoners who are in prison now, these terrorists in the u.s., have never caused trouble, have never been an issue, and that's simply not true. they bring a huge danger to the american people, and there's no reason at in this point to let them, to let them out. james madison said in 1788 when they were ratifying the constitution in virginia, he warned about the encroachment of the executive branch over the rest of the, the rest of our congress. and now we're seeing more and more of that. the congress has said that we cannot do that, there's legislation written that says we cannot do this, however, it is still -- it's out there, and the way that it seems to work here is once an idea comes out, it's not let go of. we might not hear about it for a
while, but the seeds are sown, and they look to bring these people back. megyn: this would be really tough because we already have an you're crowding problem in our prisons, and they'd have to be segregated from the rest of the inmate population, and that could cause other inmates to be triple bunked. not a lot of folks are going to have a ton of sympathy for those in prison, but that is a problem for the guards, for the way we run our prison systems, it costs money and so on, and the argument on the other side has been they're fine down in gitmo. i mean, they're well taken care of, and -- but dianne feinstein and others believe it's become a political, it's used against us by our enemies, having them there. >> well, yes. but bringing them back here does not solve that. what we're going to find out, if they come back here, we're going to hear from the left these people are in prison in the u.s., they've not been convicted of any terrorism, they're being treated differently than the other prisoners, and let's let
them out. i guarantee you, that's going to be the slippery slope that comes here. and then the president could give them executive clemency as clinton did -- megyn: i was going to say, you think that could not happen -- >> of course it could happen. megyn: i can't say that to you, joe. >> no, you can't, because it has happened. they never requested clemency, they didn't can even accept it for 0 days, and oscar lopez, who i faced at his parole hearing last year, he turned it down. so if the political will, and i'll use that term, i'll use dianne feinstein's term, it's the political will of the president or a future president is to release these people, that's what's going to happen. megyn: you were 9 years old when your father died. >> yeah. megyn: on january 24, 1975, on your birthday -- >> it was four days after my birthday, i turned 9 on the 20th, and it was going to be our birthday celebration that night. my mom cooked a special meal for
us -- megyn: that's you on the left here. >> yeah. my dad loved boats, and we were at one of the lakes that we used to like to go to. it's a great picture. i love that picture. megyn: it's a beautiful picture. >> my dad was a great man. megyn: beautiful family. >> he didn't deserve what he got, and i'm afraid the first thing's going to happen with steve, my cousin steve who was killed on 9/11, was my dad's godson. i was in the building when the planes hit, i saw the planes hit from 60 wall street where i worked, and i'll never forget it. that was only blocks from where my father was killed, and i saw the planes hit that killed steve and had to go back to his family that night in new jersey and face my uncle who'd been through it twice. i know how we felt when clinton released these guys, and i can see this happening again. we have to, we have to stop it now because if we don't, a slippery slope. it will slowly gain momentum, and you'll see in the next four years they'll be released.
megyn: joe connor, thank you so much for being here. >> thank you for having me, megyn. merry christmas. megyn: and to you. >> thank you. megyn: new support for a plan that could save billions of dollars for u.s. taxpayers, but it would get rid of the dollar bill. up next, could the dollar bill be going away, and what would that mean if it does? and as treasury secretary tim geithner meets with congressional leaders ability the fiscal cliff, house speaker john boehner says there's no progress to report. so what now? we'll have a fair and balanced debate just ahead. >> no substantive progress has been made in the talks between the white house and the house over the last two weeks.
the new york daily news reports that no shootings, stabbings or even slashings were reported on monday. [laughter] congratulations! and while it's rare to go an entire day without such violent crimes near new york, some say it's not a total surprise. you see, the current stats show the nypd is on track to finish 2012 with just over 400 murders reported. that's a far cry from 1990 when more than 2,000 murders were recorded, so, you see, everything is relative here in new york city. just like in your town, right? ♪ megyn: that is the kind of report that makes nana pick up the phone and call me and say why do you live in that city? okay. there is a new government watchdog report just released to congress today that suggests that replacing the dollar, the dollar bill, with a coin could save the government billions in printing costs. the idea has the backing of some major players on capitol hill, but average americans have typically not been too keen on the idea. trace gallagher live in our west
coast newsroom. trace? >> reporter: megyn, thank you for coming to class. the argument goes as follows, the paper dollar costs 5.2 cents to produce, right? but it lasts less than five years in circulation. that dollar coin you were talking about? it costs 15 cents to produce, but look at that, it lasts more than 30 years in circulation, so it costs three times as much, but it lasts at least six times as long, and it could go for much longer than that. government savings over those 30 years of $4.4 billion. ah, but there's a problem you pointed out: americans, we absolutely hate the dollar coins. take a look at this gallup poll from 2006. 79% of americans were opposed to switching from dollar bills to dollar coins. now, as time goes on we're not falling in love with the dollar anymore. look at this, 2011, 40% of all dollar coins were returned to the treasury, so the treasury actually stopped making them saying, look, we've got enough
of these things to last us for the next 10-20 years. now, the treasury won't make 'em anymore, but this is becoming a global trend. australia, canada, japan, france, spain, a list of countries have all switched to dollar copies, and you mentioned some power players supporting this? senators tom harkin, the dem cat -- democrat from iowa, john mccain from arizona pote in favor of this because their respective states, arizona rich with copper, iowa rich with metals. they would benefit from this. and here's the bottom line, if we do this -- switch over to the dollar coin -- we might get rid of the penny altogether. and that would be good, megyn, because the penny now costs more to produce than it's worth, about a penny and a half to produce a penny. not really logical. megyn: why didn't people like the dollar coin, the sacajawea? >> reporter: right, on the back, because the presidents kept switching. too heavy. too bulky. you had ten bucks in your pocket, you know, you hate having change in your pocket, that was the big complaint, just
too heavy. megyn: i liked it. it felt like more than a dollar, you know? it felt like i could use it for, i don't know, something real. [laughter] >> reporter: well -- megyn: i guess i was in the minority. so we'll see whether there's any objection from george washington although abraham lincoln although they still find themselves -- what's washington on in the coin field? >> reporter: the quarter? megyn: he's on the quarter, so he's got that going for him. lincoln's on the $5 bill, so really, he'll be fine. thanks, trace. we're taking your thoughts on that. breaking news in washington, speaker of the house john boehner saying no substantive progress has been made in weeks on a deal to prevent tax hikes and spending cuts in the new year. democrats firing back that republicans haven't offered any plan, and the american people remain caught in the middle. plus, former president george h.w. bush hospitalized. we will bring you the very latest on his condition. and the battle of coworkers
versus cosmetic enhancements as one teachers' union opts to layoff some of its staffers to keep a health care plan that they love because it pays for liposuction. ♪ are you receiving a payout from a legal settlement or annuity over 10 or even 20 years? call imperial structured settlements. the experts at imperial can convert your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today. @i've been a superintendent for 30 some years at many different park service units across the united states.
that puts us in control. our abundant natural gas is already saving us money, producing cleaner electricity, putting us to work here in america and supporting wind and solar. though all energy development comes with some risk, we're committed to safely and responsibly producing natural gas. it's not a dream. america's natural gas... putting us in control of our energy future, now.
megyn: developing this hour, we are getting new details on why former president george h.w. bush has been hospital used in houston -- hospitalized in houston. the 88-year-old is suffering from complications resulting from bronchitis. casey steegal following this live from dallas. >> reporter: yeah, megyn. according to the family spokesperson, the president was admitted to the hospital on the day after thanksgiving for this bronchitis. he's being treated at the methodist hospital which is down in houston, and the family spokesperson continues to say that he's in stable condition, his doctors expect that he will be released from the hospital within the next 72 hours. at issue here has apparently been a lingering cough. his son, former president george w. bush and his wife laura, visiting him there over the weekend. listen. >> the entire family has rallied to him both in person. neil lives here in houston, of course, mrs. bush has been vigilant in her visitation, she's been by his side
constantly, and other family members have checked in by phone regularly. so we're all pulling for him, but happifully, it's not life threatening. >> reporter: now, in recent years the president has been diagnosed with a form of parkinson's decide, -- disease, but for an 88-year-old, he's had an otherwise clean bill of health. back in 2004 he went skydiving over his presidential library to celebrate his 80th birthday, a tandem jump with stars like chuck norris and our own brit hume. we're, of course, keeping the president and his family in our thoughts and prayers, but the good news, he's expected to be released before the week is over. megyn: glad to hear it. casey, thanks. new signs that negotiations may be breaking down in washington's effort to head off a series of automatic tax hikes and deep spending cuts expected to hit americans hard in the new year. in just the last couple of
hours, both sides came out of meetings with the treasury secretary and said it is up to the other side to come up with a plan everyone can live with. >> so right now all eyes are on the white house. our country doesn't need a victory lap, it needs leadership. it's time for the president, congressional democrats to tell the american people what spending cuts they're really willing to make. >> if republicans ip cyst on spending -- insist on spending cuts being part of a down payment as discussed at the november 16th meeting, to us in is on them to come forward with some ideas. the president's budget contains over $300 billion in health savings. if the republicans don't like those ideas, they should make a counteroffer. it's silly to think the president is going to negotiate with himself. megyn: oh, joy. you can see the progress being made. [laughter] joining me now to discuss it, simon rosenberg, who is president and founder of ndn, a think tank and advocacy organization, also former
campaign adviser to president clinton. and marc thiessen, former speech writer for president george w. bush. so they are at a stalemate, i guess we could say. the republicans wanted spending cuts, and the democrats wanted tax hikes, and the democrats have proposed tax hikes on the rich. republicans have said, well, we don't want that, but we will put revenue on the table if you agree to some spending cuts. and now both sides are saying you show us your proposed spending cuts first. do i have it about right, marc? >> yeah, about right, essentially. look, the president -- i think it's very clear, i think at least, that the democrats want to go off the fiscal cliff. you can see it in the fact that president obama's out there campaigning instead of sitting down with john boehner, running around pushing for a bill to increase -- extend just the middle class tax cuts which he knows republicans will never do. you can see it in the fact that 33 senate democrats signed this
letter which says, quote, we will oppose including social security cuts for current or future pen fisheries in any -- beneficiaries at any time. that's signed by harry reid. senator durbin giving a speech saying no touching medicare or medicaid in any year end package. so, basically, the democratic position is no changes to social security, no changes to medicare, no changes to medicaid, yet the mainstream media all you hear is three words: grover, grover, grover. all you hear is about republican intransigence on taxes. where are the stories about democratic intransigence on entitlements? it seems to me that what they want to do is go off the fiscal cliff, pocket the increase on the wealthy, the tax increase on the wealthy, and blame republicans for the middle class tax increases. and if that's what they want to do, then republicans should say let's go with 'em. megyn: simon, what about the spending cuts? >> well, first of all, i was in a meeting with the president two days ago, private meeting, and
he made it very clear he doesn't want to go over a fiscal cliff, and his preference is to do a deal with the republicans. so i think what marc said at the beginning is not true. it may look that way, and i think we're in the early stages of what is going to be -- you know, any kind of negotiation that goes on, you've got both sides fighting in the beginning, and hopefully at the end we're going to come together for a deal. the democrats have accepted spending cuts already, right? in 2011 we accepted a trillion dollars in domestic spending cuts. in our passage of the health care bill in 2010, we cut $716 billion out of medicare which the republicans have attacked us on for the last -- megyn: that was used to fund obamacare. >> it doesn't matter. it doesn't matter -- >> exactly. sure it does. >> it doesn't matter. we cut an entitlement program, right? and so -- >> and spent it somewhere else. >> which the republicans haven't done. and so we've already shown -- >> oh, my gosh. >> -- that we are willing to do the hard things required to reduce the testify sit. we want to raise -- deficit. we want to raise taxes, cut
defense -- we're willing to do all four of those things. megyn: marc, how does taking money out of medicare and giving it to obamacare cut spending? [laughter] >> it doesn't. >> that's not what i said, megyn. that's not what i said. >> it doesn't cut spending. they cut money out of medicare and put it to fund obamacare, but president obama has not put forward a plan to deal with the entitlement crisis. he put forward no plan on social security, medicare or medicaid, which he himself admits is what is driving the debt and driving the real fiscal crisis. so they have put forward no plans whatsoever, and when paul ryan and others have put forward our plans, they've pilied them for it. i'm glad president obama's meeting with simon. i'd love for him to meet with john john boehner. [laughter] megyn: simon's got a lot of good ideas. were you in that meeting with the unions and the progressive groups that the president had -- >> no.
i was in a different meeting. they can't meet with all at the same time. megyn: were you in the meeting that the progressive groups emerged from feeling, quote, very happy where they felt that the white house with us not going -- was not going to offer any spending cuts? they felt those programs were all going to be protected? >> no, no, i don't think that's what was said after that meeting. i think what the democrats want is balance. i think they're willing to give. i mean, in the president's budget now is $300 billion of additional cuts in medicare, and this is why what marc's saying is just not true. the democrats have shown a willingness to give on all four of the places we think we need to give. it's been the republicans who have been intransigent on tax increases and defense cuts. if we can come to a deal like we did in 2011, we cut medicare, we propose more medicare cuts, we want to cut defense, raise taxes, we can get a deal. i'm optimistic. i think this can get done in the next few weeks. megyn: i want to ask -- i want to get your reaction, marc, but just as we're discussing this,
now the democrats are trying to make the next debt ceiling increase part of this already-difficult negotiation. and the reason we're about to go off the cliff is because the two parties argued over the last increase in the debt ceiling to the point where they had to reach a deal that put us at risk of going over the cliff right now. so now we're going -- we're about to go over the cliff, and we have to raise our debt limit again, and the democrats are saying either we agree to raise that debt ceiling limit right now in the context of these negotiations, or else. and this is just crossing the wires right now that the white house says the debt ceiling increase should be done, and it should be done soon and without drama, and it would be deeply irresponsible if congressional republicans require a political price for doing it. want to get your reaction to that, marc. >> well, i think speaker boehner made a very, very clear rule last time around which is $1 of spending cuts for every dollar of debt limit increase, and republicans need to stick to that, because that's the only
responsible way to deal with the debt. but listen, the democrats' position is they want to raise taxes in this, and they want to have a tax deal. if you take president obama's tax increases, $82 billion a year. that doesn't even run -- that barely runs the post office for a year, much less the federal government. so there's not enough money there. you have to deal with into it with elements if you ever want to get this under control. simon keeps saying that the democrats are not intransgem. this is a letter signed by 33 senate democrats saying no changes to social security at all, ever, under any deal. megyn: even future. >> future. and year-end future. the democrats are absolutely intransigent on entitlements, this is what they're secretly saying to their supporters, and that's why they're going to go off the cliff. megyn: simon raises points about the president's budget and proposed spending cuts, but we have not had a budget out of the democrat-controlled senate in more than three years now. he wasn't able to get a vote -- >> i bet the democrats vote that
one down too, like the last one. megyn: we'll see what happens. we're only in december. thanks, guys. >> thanks, megyn. megyn: coming up, a murder trial may reveal the downside to winning last night's lottery. well, it's a different case, but how one man wound up dead after striking it rich, and whether the woman accused of of stealing his winnings could wind up a free woman. and amid rumors that u.n. ambassador susan rice could be our next secretary of state, our former attorney general, michael mukasey, says he has a laundry list of reasons why that should not happen, and they go well beyond how she handled the talking points on the death of four americans in benghazi. >> when discussing the attacks against our facilities in benghazi, i relied solely and squarely on the information provided to me by the intelligence community. can i help you? i heard you guys can ship ground for less than the ups store. that's right. i've learned the only way to get a holiday deal is to camp out. you know we've been open all night.
opposition to u.n. ambassador susan rice's possible nomination to the position of secretary of state. ms. rice had a rough week trying to mend fences on capitol hill, unsuccessfully as it turns out, it seems, over her statements in the immediate aftermath of the terror attack that killed four americans in benghazi on 9/11. but today former attorney general michael mukasey offers a list of reasons why ambassador rice may not be qualified for the job, and they go well beyond benghazi. joining me now, michael mukasey. welcome back, sir. >> thanks for having me. megyn: so i think our viewers know the benghazi story, and you also have similar suggestions to those we've heard raised by republican senators, but what else? you didn't hear a lot about susan rice in the first term of president obama. what are your objections to her? >> well, part of it has to do with the fact that you didn't hear about her, which means a whole lot didn't get done at the united nations. but beyond that, when benjamin netanyahu gave his speech describing -- it was a very significant speech as head of state -- >> describing why -- megyn: two months ago.
>> yeah -- why the survival of his country depends on stopping iran from weaponizing its stock of uranium, he -- she was absent. megyn: here he is at the united nations in september making the case our viewers may remember at this moment. >> i do. megyn: so she didn't show up. >> correct. megyn: why not? >> she was of off at a luncheon meeting of some negotiators -- megyn: well, she was busy. >> this is a head of state, an ally of the united states talking about a highly significant issue. it seems to me that the lunch, if that's what it was, or the meeting if that's what it was, could have waited. megyn: you feel like it was a snub? >> it's not a question of how i feel. i think it was perceived as a snub, and it was -- the fact that she wasn't there was commented on, and i think any diplomat with a pulse would know that it would be commented on. megyn: you also have an issue with our participation in the u.n. human rights council which has been very anti-israel.
and her defense is, look, we do it because it would have been even worse if america hadn't been there to defend israel as this israel bashing went on. >> part of the problem with that statement is that it's indefensible. she made that statement two weeks after the human rights council finished a session in which it passed more israel-bashing resolutions than it had at any session before. so if her presence is doing any good -- or our presence is doing any good, it's not perceptible. megyn: what about syria? we've lost our focus on it in the recent weeks and months with the election, but they are involved in a civil war now, and it was said that bashar assad was about to go. well, he hasn't gone, and, you know, thousands upon thousands of children are dying in syria, many being tortured in front of tear families, and the -- in front of their families, and the unite isn't doing that much. we tried to do something at the united nations, it failed.
>> it failed in large measure because the chinese and russians -- with whom we were supposed to have hit the reset button, remember that? -- haven't allowed anything to get done. and this person who was supposed to be a superb diplomat hasn't mansioned to get -- managed to get that off square one. the united nations have sent an observer, and what they're observing is what you described. megyn: do you think another u.n. ambassador could have gotten something done? do you think if we had a john bolton, for example, they could have convinced russia to go against syria? do you think so? >> short answer is, i don't think. but i think it pays to ask the questions. this person is being put forward as secretary of state. what have you done in your post to warrant that? she was also, by the way, absent at the initial vote on the attempt the to break the israeli blockade that was launched out of turkey. when the u.n. convened an emergency session, again at the
first session she was nowhere to be found. that's why i said there were other things that could be brought forward at a hearing like that. megyn: i want to talk to you, though, about whether this is secretary rice or ambassador rice's, you know, problem or whether this is a president obama problem. who sets the policy? and i also want to ask you about the other possible choice, which is john kerry. we'll do that after the break. ♪
♪ megyn: and rejoining us now, michael mukasey, former attorney general of the united states. welcome back to you. i want to ask you about this, so her approach at the united nations, do we pin that on her, or do we pin that on her boss, president obama? >> look, to the extent that it's policy, we pin it on her boss because the president sets policy, no doubt about that. and the u.n. secretary, the u.n. ambassador does not. but i think all of this ought to be aired at a hearing so we can
find out what it is that the policy was, what it is that was effective/ineffective. so far as showing up at either the vote on the blockade breaking or the netanyahu speech, i can't believe that the president told her not to show up, and if that's the case, then somebody ought to find out about it. megyn: what about the notion that the president is entitled to have the folks he wants in these positions? these are folks who represent him, who advise him and that there should be some deference to the president in, you know, even if you don't like ms. rice, he likes her, and he's entitled to have her counsel? >> absolutely. but that's what hearings are about. they're about finding out a person's qualifications, about finding out what it is that we're getting. because she's representing not only the president, she's representing the united states of america as secretary of state and as u.n. ambassador, if that matter -- for that matter. so although the president may get his choice, if she's representing all of us, we ought to find out what she's about.
megyn: the reason we have the confirmation process. finally, josh kerry is the other -- john kerry is the other possible main candidate for secretary of state. your thoughts on him? >> threw away his war medals, called his fellow soldiers in vietnam war criminals and then during a debate in 2004 said the united states should not use force internationally without getting the approval of everybody else. that's not somebody i want to see as secretary of state. megyn: who do you like? >> hard to think. megyn: [laughter] >> carl levin, very experienced man. megyn: we'll leave it at that. >> leave it at that. megyn: general, great to see you. all the best, sir. coming up, the senate homeland security committee holding a hearing, we will speak with one of the senators in on that hearing. plus a woman on trial accused of befriending and killing a lottery winner. and new technology offering
now is a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand medicare and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you.
with this type of plan, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, all medicare supplement plans help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. if you're thinking about
your options, call today. when you call, request your free decision guide. and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that may be right for you. megyn: fox news alert. brand-new reaction from the white house to new signs negotiations may be breaking down in washington's effort to head off a series of automatic tax hikes and spending cuts expected to hit americans hard in the next year. welcome, everyone, i'm megyn kelly. treasury secretary meeting with members on both sides of the aisle. the white house appears to be trying to separate a deal on tax hikes which it wants from a deal on spending cuts which republicans want and republicans are pushing back. house speaker john boehner after meeting with secretary geithner
warned, this is not a game. >> the revenue was only on the table if there were serious spending cuts as part of this agreement. it has to be part of the agreement. we have a debt crisis. we are spending too much. while we are willing to put revenue on the table we have to recognize it'sed the spending that's out of control. megyn: ed henry is on the lawn of the white house. you spoke with carney about this move by the white house to separate the two things out, get the tax hikes first, then later deal with the spending cuts and today we appear to have the republican answer. >> reporter: jay carney appears to be making news saying the white house is in fact open to having spending cuts as part of this discussion in the fiscal cliff talks. i think what is going on here is the white house heard the criticism and they are trying to
breathe some new life into these talks. politico reported there was a phone call between the president and speaker boehner. they claim it was curt as in a short call that did not go well. jay carney just pushed back and said it was a 28-minute phone call. he said it was frank and direct. and it was good, it was positive. they believe, the white house does, that they are making progress. but i pressed jay carney. i said will spending cuts be included? and here is what he said. >> can you hold up that budget, look in the camera and say to your fellow democrats on capitol hill, vote for and include some of these spending cuts in this deal to avoid the fiscal cliff? because that's not what they are doing. should they include those? >> yes. and i know that democrats accept that there -- this has to be a
balanced package that includes revenues and cuts and spending cuts. >> reporter: so news the white house is saying different from yesterday that spending cuts should be part of these fiscal cliff talks. where it may break down on the part about whether the president will push democrats on capitol hill to go along. it was tuesday that dick durbin said spending cuts, medicare cuts, ets, should not be part of these fiscal cliff cuts. we'll see whether durbin and others on the hill go along with what jay carney is saying. we'll see if that improves the possibility of a deal. megyn: we have 33 democratic lawmakers saying we are not touching social security now or for the future. this jackhammer is really rude. >> reporter: the cuts are being made as we speak.
it's hard to cut the government. megyn: alert frank, the two guys features in your first report. someone else came to the white house hat must have been an extraordinary moment. mitt romney and obama get together. for me it's awkward that they had the meeting at the white house. was that mean? shouldn't they have don't at a tgif. neutral ground? not to rub his nose in the place that he wanted to live. >> reporter: given romney's finances, -- he came here, he left without talking to reporters. we are digging for details on how it went. the white house insists they were trying to be open and courteous to mitt romney.
show the peaceful transfer -- there is no violence. the race was hard fought. mr. obama won, in romney moves on and mr. romney also sat down with another important man in all this. fall ryan his running-mate. that would be interesting to be a fly on the wall. megyn: there are funny lines on twitter about that meeting and what should have been served at the meeting. thank you, sir. a white house social media effort to tip the public opinion in its favor on these fiscal cliff negotiations is starting to get controversial. the president urging americans to go to twitter and tweet my2k. do you know what it means? if you are on twitter and you want to get a conversation going
you can do hash tag which is the pound sign and then put something in. in this case they want you to put in my2k which is my $2,000 if we go over the cliff. republicans says this ignores larger issues including out-of-control spend and entitlements. conservative think tanks are using hash tag my2k possibly making the online debate more complex. we are learning what went on behind closed doors at a senate homeland security briefing on the deadly terror attack on our consulate in libya. our next guest was inside that room. ron johnson joins me now. senator, welcome to the program. what can you tell us about this morning and what we learned.
did the ball get advanced into this investigation in benghazi? >> i came away from that hearing with the conclusion that this administration mislead the american public for a couple weeks after that attack and used ambassador rice as the tool to go on the sunday news programs to do part of the large job of that misleading. when she went on those talk shows and said in fact this was a spontaneous reaction to the video she knew full well it wasn't in fact. there was certainly doubt about that. this administration understood early on this was a terrorist attack. the report showed it was probably perpetrated by groups affiliated by al qaeda. they purposely mislead the american public. we need to get to the bottom of who directed ambassador rice to do that. it falls on president obama.
megyn: who briefed you this morning? >> we had a number of people from the intelligence community as well as the department of defense as well as state department. megyn: yesterday or two days ago weed a kelly ayotte who talked about originally when miss rice came to capitol hill to meet with her the cia acting director who was with her said it was the fbi who changed the talking points to remove the reference to al qaeda having been the ones behind that attack on our consulate. then later in the day they said they got a call from the acting cia director and miss rice saying that was the wrong information. it wasn't the fbi, it was us, the cia who changed the talking points. there is still a question about who specifically did it. has any light been shed on that? >> they are doing internal review of that and putting together a time line exactly who looked at the talking points and
made that change to kind of reveal that information. but really the question is who gave those talking points to ambassador rice, who did direct the entire effort of changing the narrative. in the end i think what this is all about is this president and this administration -- somebody running for reelection didn't want the narrative that we killed bin laden and al qaeda was decimated. because al qaeda isn't decimated. it's on the rise and threatening america. megyn: they say we weren't entirely sure that it was al qaeda. and there was no reason to throw that name out there that early in the ballgame, and we were still investigating and may have had security reasons for not revealing all we knew. >> there were no issues in terms of revealing intelligence
sources or methods by talking about an al qaeda affiliated group. it wasn't in fact a spontaneous reaction. they didn't know that with certainty, and that's what ambassador rice led the american people to believe. when they realized the that wasn't a fact. that's where the misleading occurs. you have to ask yourself why. president obama is running for reelection. he didn't want to bust the narrative he had al qaeda on the run. megyn: this is a bipartisan investigation in the senate. democrats including some top democrats have joined in the demands for more information on how this all happened and how we wound up where we are now. what are you hearing now from democrats about where we stand in this investigation. >> they certainly -- i believe they agree with republicans that
the administration did understand early on that this was probably a terrorist attack. how they come to their conclusions in terms of ambassador rice i'm not sure. my concern with ambassador rice being put forward as a nominee for secretary of state. we need a secretary of state that is credible. not many up here on the hill but with the american people. i'm afraid ambassador rice has blown that level of credibility with the american people and i think it's disqualifying. all the best. see you soon. new research on the white house plan to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff is raising concerns about how much the tax hikes can do to keep the economy afloat. the edover an influential financial paper he says america needs to be focused on. a case showing the potential down sides of winning the lottery. we'll detail the case of a man who struck it rich big time, and
then was found dead and buried under a concrete slab in someone's backyard. now could the woman accused of stealing his cash and killing him wind up a free woman? "kelly's court" takes a look. >> i would never hurt that man. he knows, everyone knows i would never hurt that man in any way. t from a legal settlement or annuity over 10 or even 20 years? call imperial structured settlements. the experts at imperial can convert your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today.
and i'm here to tell homeowners that are 62 and older about a great way to live a better retirement. it's called a reverse mortgage. [ male announcer ] call right now to receive your free dvd and booklet with no obligation. it answers questions like how a reverse mortgage works, how much you qualify for, the ways to receive your money, and more. plus, when you call now, you'll get this magnifier with l.e.d. light absolutely free. when you call the experts at one reverse mortgage today, you'll learn the benefits of a government-insured reverse mortgage. it will eliminate your monthly mortgage payments and give you tax-free cash from the equity in your home. and here's the best part -- you still own your home. take control of your retirement today. ♪
started from a small metal strip that fell onto the runway just before the concord took off. >> right now all eyes are on the white house. the country doesn't need a victory lap, it needs leadership. it's time for the president, and congressional democrats to tell the american people what spending cuts they are willing to make. >> if republicans insist on spending cuts being part of the onus is on them to come forward with some ideas. the president's budget contains $300 billion in health savings. if the republicans couldn't like those ideas they should make a counter offer. it's silly to think the president is going to negotiate with himself. megyn: that was speaker boehner and senator chuck schumer. negotiations seem to have run into trouble as washington tries to head off tax hikes on every
one and spending cuts expected to hit americans hard come 2013. americans have argued tax hikes alone won't get the job done. raising tax on the top 2% of earners will raise $850 billion. but federal spending will be 52 times more than the new revenues. so you can receive it doesn't get it done. joining me now, michael ramirez. the senior editor and political cartoonist. the paper ran an editorial making this same argument. welcome to the program. so it's clear that tax hikes on the rich would be pea spoons in the ocean. we -- would be teaspoons in the ocean. we need spending cuts. the democrats are saying we'll look to the president's last budget for spending cuts that he
proposed. senator reid never got him a vote on that budget in the senate. but is that a starting point? >> it isn't. it's an unserious proposal. remember when the president promised $2.50 worth of cuts for every new dollar in revenue? yet they are putting forth a budget that spends $1.5 trillion in deficit. an administration that added $5.3 trillion to the debt in the last four years. everybody complained about the bush administration adding $4 $4.trillion in 8 years. this 2% tax will bring in $50 billion to $82 billion a year with deficits at $1.3 to $1.5 trillion a year. it's not a serious propose at at all. the biggest problem and what is being lost in the discussion is
the impact this has on tour economy. that's what the structure of this argument should shall surrounding. what can we do to get this economy which is the economic recovery since the great depression to get going? what is going to get the 23.6 million people that are unemployed or under employed or dropped out of the job market completely jobs? that's the solution to a long-term problem. megyn: that's what they argued about in the president campaign. growth is the way out. but the question is, all right. the growth would be nice, but no one is talking about that right now. they are talking about spending cuts and tax hikes. and the republicans -- you tell me, but it seems like they are starting to be a fissure in the once united front on holding firm against these tax hikes until they got their spending cuts. boehner was strong on it. but we are starting to hear a couple of republican voices say
agree to the tax reduction on the middle class and tax hikes on the rich in exchange for nothing and we'll talk about the rest later. >> that's the big problem. the untenable political position where they lost election in a pretty big substantial way. so it's a losing political argument to say we are going to capture or stop our progress off the fiscal cliff in exchange for these kind of tax hikes. megyn: is that consistent with the republicans' history. you wrote about president reagan saying he sought to protect future generations from the government's desire to spend future generations' money and tax them into servitude when the tax become due.
>> the truth matter is what we are doing is fiscally irresponsible and unsustainable. the on solution we have to our economy and future problems is a sustained economic growth. raising taxes during this economic downturn -- remember president obama just a couple years ago didn't want to raise taxes because he thought it would hurt the economy. well, the economy is worse now than it was then. frankly, if you look at the dynamic shift in demographics our entitlements are growing at a time when our working population is decreasing. the only answer to all these problems is sustained economic growth. it's the economy, stupid. megyn: what if the republicans say we agree, raise the taxes on the rich. and then what would happen? then what they would be debating about when that most likely didn't fix the problem, quick last word.
>> it's a terrible position for the republicans to be in. their only negotiating coin right now. and to give in without doing something to figure out these entitlement program would be a disaster for the republican party. megyn: michael, thanks. coming up, a provocative column in the "wall street journal" on race in america.
megyn: the teacher's union in buffalo, new york attracted national attention when we learned their contract benefits include coverage for taxpayer turned plastic surgeries. the issue came up again and trace gallagher picks up our story from there. >> reporter: we have as you said done this story before.
it's been public for a few years, yet the program still exists. back in the 70s the before teacher's union struck a deal saying they could get free cosmetic surgery. a nip, tuck on the taxpayers. this school district is $50 million in debt. that's the deficit there, yet their graduation rate is just over 50%. half of students don't graduate at all. last year alone the buffalo teachers got $2.7 million worth of plastic surgery. the school board is threatening to lay off teachers. the board said the teachers can keep their jobs but you have got to drop the plastic surgery perk and the union said no, fire the teachers. they haven't negotiated a new contract since 2004, and a school watchdog group that came
up with these new numbers said why would you renegotiate when you have these kinds of bennys. >> they won't voluntarily give this up because they don't think that way. they don't think in the best interests of students or taxpayers. they think in the best interests of themselves. they are thinking what can we get in order to give this thing up. i think that's what's happening. >> reporter: they are getting a nip and tuck but they are cutting costs elsewhere? no, teacher's conference, air fair and hotels and limb signs last year, $200,000 for that. did i mention the graduation rate is just over 50%? megyn: what kind of plastic surgery is it? >> reporter: liposuction. facelifts, dermabrasion.
you name it. you get it. megyn: all right, trace, thank you. what do you think of that? taxpayer funded lipo. are you upset you didn't win the big powerball jackpot? you need to hear our story. we'll tell you about the lottery winner who was allegedly murdered for his millions. and troubling new developments out of syria. a complete internet blackout cutting the war-torn nation off from the world. but who did it. a new column claiming america is becoming more divided across racial lines than almost ever before. we'll look at the evidence and debate with our panel. >> americans have sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of
traffic said 12:30 local time syria disappeared from the internet. the activists are blaming the government. the assad regime says the terrorists are responsible. new video of the rebels reportedly taking down a helicopter. you can hear gunfire and see smoke and flames before the helicopter looses power and crashes in a field. >> young and old, rich and poor, democrat and republican, black, white, hispanic, asian, native american gay, straight, disabled and not disabled. americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states, we are and always will be the
united states of america. megyn: there are new questions about whether our political process is further dividing this country intoy different groups in america instead of the united states of america. a provocative column in the "wall street journal" details the racialization of american politics and the president's webpage is adding to this debate. it asks supporters to take a survey. there is no box for white, european or even males. what do we make of all explain to us what you mean when you talk about an obsession with
racial categories and the racialization of american politics. >> i think it' a destructive process. it occurred to me after the election when the day or so after the election the conventional wisdom was that the republican party had become too white. and i kept looking for them to explain what is the implication saying a group of people is too white and it never came. then i looked at the exit polls and even the exit polls have people self identified as white or hispanic or black or asian the way college students or high school students when they are applying for college have to tick off what race they belong to. i said to myself if the republican party is asked to be made for appeal together american people why are they being asked to categorize themselves whether people are white or black or hispanic? megyn: a broad demographics check ... >> i think the implication is
you have to appeal to people as ethnic categories rather than people trying to enter the middle class and gain a leg up in america and find a way up towards the opportunity which is what i think the republican party should be doing a better job talking about rather than trying to elevate these racial categories. megyn: do you think there was a lot of focus on race in the last election appealing to different racial groups? >> i think there has been a narrative that has been spun that the president is somehow seek something divide the country by race. the reality is, i don't think they get. the bottom line is the country has changed. it's continuing to change than the's a good thing. i'm a small business owner. there are issues specific to me as a small business owner that other people who work for corporations don't care as much about those issues. i think it's perfectly fair game
for the president to ask specific groups what issues are important to them. the reality is we are different and that's not a bad thing. and pointing that as you and showcasing it and appealing to people based on what their concerned about is not a bad thing. i think that's where the republicans are missing the boat. this not about dividing, it's about understanding what issues are important to different groups. >> i think there is a balance. it makes me sad to put everybody in a box. as a woman i hate when people call out i'm a woman. during the debates i felt pandered to as a woman. it happens with race and age and economic status. and i feel like it is dividing the country and it makes me sad. instead us coming together as one team and putting ourselves against everybody out there as americans. we are saying my group is important. and a lot of times it actually creates limitations. when you put somebody in that special interest group's like ok
we checked that box off instead of saying let's look at the merits. let's look at your character. let's focus on those kinds of points rather than who you are in terms of what you look like or where you come from. megyn: we mentioned the exclusion of certain groups. the obama campaign sent out an e-mail that invites supporters to take this survey. there is a box for women but not one for men. but later, no, there isn't one for men. there is one for women. but there is later gender question that asks you to self-identify as male, female or other. i assume this means transgender. entrance gender identify themselves as one sex or the other. are the excluding certain groups? >> groups begin to exclude themselves. they see themselves as discreet
island. we all go worrying about the sensitivity of women or blacks or hispanics. i think it's divisive. i think it divides the country in a way that is not healthy oh productive. there has always bent idea of the united states as a melting pot where people come together. they assimilate and take up american describing 60ss and take upped the -- american characteristics. megyn >> the christmas you have got adult and the white men are the adult and you can have a seat at kiddy table because around woman or minority group. i want a seat at that big table. megyn: i made a comment during the debates about pandering to women. it was women, women, women.
and i don't understand why it rubbed me the wrong way. it made me feel like i'm a special interest group and i must just care about these women's issues. then people pushed back, they said you may have another layer of issues that you care about and is that pandering or just looking to say to you i realize you have another set of concerns and i want to address them. >> you can't have kids, right? you can't give birth. so there are differences here. and there is no problem with that. but they are not going to be as important to him because he doesn't have to live through certain things. i think the problem is what is america? america is a melting pot. it's okay if we don't all like and love the same things. my problem with this debate is we are different. and i think you can be both. i think you can celebrate the differences. you can choose to live your
culture the way you want to live it and at the same time celebrate the greater american culture whatever that is. megyn: you seem to be arguing that it has an effect of dividing whites from the others and can take us backwards to a place we worked hard to move on from. >> i'm asking what does it mean to say that a people or party are too white. does it mean all of the people who happen to live in the suburbs don't care about people of color or minorities? i think it's being used for political purpose to divide those people and push them away from the hispanics and blacks who voted democratic. >> 75 per of the asians voted
democrat is. 70 per of jews voted democratic. blacks, hispanics. white people voted democratic, too. they may not have voted in the numbers you are talking about. the suburbs -- black people live in the suburbs, too. so you are stereotyping at this very table. >> what do it mean -- >> i think what it means is people feel the republican party has alienated groups of people in this country who are not white and who are not male. if you look at the committee chair selections made by the house gop, no women were chosen to chair a major committee by the gop. you are saying there are no qualified women. >> i don't know whether they did that in the house of
representatives. >> they did. >> the congress is full of women. they are full of blacks. the black conservatives by and large who come on the program like this and align themselves with the republican party get vilified and ostracized. when condoleezza rice was secretary of state, was she celebrated? >> she was associated with the bush administration. if the gop want to solve this problem it goes back to creating relationships. it means getting into the communities. reaching out to the quote-unquote special interest groups saying we care about you and putting the across ahead of the word. start work on it today for four years from now. >> one woman's murder trial gets
and tools to estimate what my care may cost. so i never missed a beat. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. megyn: if you are sitting at home wishing you won the powerball jackpot and you didn't. sometimes that blessing can be followed by bad luck. a murder trial is going on for a woman accused of swindling the winnings from a man who won millions. florida lottery winner abraham shakespeare was killed and his body buried in a backyard after making headlines for winning the lottery big time down in flori florida. >> the prosecution contends by
the time dede moore met shakespeare he had already given away most his money to family and friends to pay their mort gauges. she took control of his assets. shakespeare shortly thereafter disappeared. while he was missing prosecutors say moore told investigators many different stories about where he might be and she contacted shakespeare's family by e-mail, text and phone, claiming to be him. >> he said hey mom, and i said who is this? he said this is abraham. i said no you don't sounds like abraham. >> reporter: his body was found beneath a concrete slab in moore's backyard shot twice in the chest with a gun. her ex-husband testified she asked him to dig a hole and a
chron crete contractor says she asked him to poor the slab. she then told police two men came to her house and killed shakespeare and allowed her to live so she could get them money. she claims shakespeare was killed by drug dealers with a gun that belonged to dede moore. megyn: could this woman manage to go free? she had the ex-husband dig the hole. is accused of swindling the guy out of his money. >> what he will you got? >> i would say there ain't no money, he's going to walk, honey. they are going to look and say by the time she knew him he was virtually had no money.
so what incentive did she have? but who did have incentive. all those folks who borrowed that money. she comes in the picture and take over the finances. this is crazy. you want all this money? you don't have a dime to your name. let me take over your finances and work on it. megyn: she says she was trying to help him after everybody else swindled him. >> i would never hurt that man. he knows i wouldn't, everyone knows i would never hurt that man in any way. >> did you murder abraham shakespeare? >> absolutely not. >> her position is drug dealers did that. i would agree if she was a drug dealer. she digs a hole in her backyard. she inserts an item in that said hole. has concrete put over that hole. unless she is inserting a tether
$50,000. >> what they need to do is argue the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. if you have a doubt, remember all those people that owe her money. if you have a doubt, he's doing it over and over and over. >>it is a circumstantial case, correct? >> it is. first all in response to what mercedes said. it's not a doubt. it's a reasonable doubt. there would can no other reasonable con including thatter than she did it. i don't know if it snowed last night. but when i went to sleep there was no snow and there was snow when i woke up. it's circumstantial about it many powerful. megyn: she allegedly had people call the guy's mother after he died pretending to be him. and she was paying them to do
that. so they would believe he was alive. >> the defense will come forward and say the drug dealers came in, they threatened her life, they killed them and said you better cover this up. this is something she is willing -- she is going to take the stand and articulate. how many cases -- we sat here -- we sat here and talked about caylee anthony. >> did you just pull out caylee anthony again? >> you and i sat here and said she is going to be guilty and she walked. the defense will argue that burden of proof over and over and over again. megyn: the exchange she had with the courtroom, it doesn't look like it's going well for her. he chided her for nodding her head and trying to influence the jurors. so she said they will think i'm